Quote:
Originally Posted by underGRADFlame
The judges job to weigh the arguments of both the prosecution and the defence and rule based on law what he/she believes is the proper application of that law.
It's less about taking a position and more about their interpretation of the law. Doesn't this happen in virtually every case before them?
|
Only those cases that are overturned on appeal. As Pepsi said, the judge is there to make decisions on the admissibility of evidence and to instruct the jury as to the law. It is the "reasonable apprehension of bias" which will open up one avenue of appeal. I haven't followed the goings on in this case, but both parties should be hoping for an unbiased judge.
__________________
From HFBoard oiler fan, in analyzing MacT's management:
O.K. there has been a lot of talk on whether or not MacTavish has actually done a good job for us, most fans on this board are very basic in their analysis and I feel would change their opinion entirely if the team was successful.
|